tv [untitled] January 7, 2012 12:31pm-1:01pm PST
leave entertainment as a legal, non-conforming use in the mixed-use neighborhood, where they anticipate the greatest amount of residential growth to take place. change the zoning to allow all forms of entertainment, with fully-permitted use. allow the non-conforming status of every existing venue to remain with the property for a reasonable length of time, if the property were to be demolished so that entertainment to be built into the new construction. allow entertainment as an accessory that is limited -- live performance, in the commercial district and the task force also approved conditions on new residential construction.
let me paraphrase this language that is before you. essentially, what this bill is into the building code is -- any noise-sensitive fuse that would move into a noisy area -- existing always, the new development would be required to conduct sensitive sound studies, of a levels in the area, and bring on an engineer who would recommend medications to the property, that would prevent a level of sound getting into the building, that violence -- violates table 24. it puts the burden on the new development, to mitigate the noise that is already there.
some people are not satisfied. compromise sometimes means that you don't get everything you want. neighbors gave up a lot in these negotiations. they have ruled out any special district for entertainment. this was an important concession at the start of the process. we never devoted a lot of time talking about entertainment. but at this late stage in the process, it is back for the third time in my lifetime, and now they call a special use district. theoretically, a special-use district could override the underlying zoning, and allows additional entertainment permits in the area of 11th street that is crowded with nightclubs and they are allowed to expand under
current law. only one has taken advantage of this provision. the problem is that many of them are empty most nights of the week and zoning has nothing to do with this. it always seems to some people that this is a solution to the enforcement issues. we have been through this before, and you can see this on the first slide, a special-use district cannot prevent them from suspending the license. a license to sell alcohol is promoted by the -- the regulations are not subject to local control. an sud cannot allow some clubs to be more noisy than others. the volume of music inside a nightclub it is one thing, but what it -- when it begins to impact those living in nearby
areas it becomes subject to state and local regulations. neighbors of nightclubs are entitled to equal protection under the law. zoning changes cannot be used to punish the neighbors for complaining. to change the status to a non- permitted use, diminishes the value of the property and opens the city to charges that are illegal -- and the special dass ---use district cannot fill up in the nightclubs. some clubs succeed and others failed. it is not within the interests of local government to choose the winners and losers. a special use district legalize. the private events that serve
food and beverages and have an impact on the surrounding community, all under various statutes that require permission and permits. the planning commission cannot take the powers of any other government agency. planning code amendments cannot save -- as much as we wish that they could. local agencies can regulate the current abuses that are loud, and a nighttime entertainment use may be allowed, and formula retail is not. they cannot require the specific use, such as a gay bar, the the only use allowed. existing housing is here to stay, whether this is adjacent to the nightclub, and has been there for one year, were 100 years, this is a fully-permitted
use, and for the planning commission to be so bold -- having mentioned the payrolls of an illegal taking, it would become a non-conforming use, and it would be grandfathered into the zoning. not going away. it does not pay to anchor the neighbors. so for the kwai use and enjoyment of your home, this is a fundamental fact of life. it was said that a man's home is his castle. it is enshrined in english common law, and has a thousand years' worth of presidents. no matter what the zoning may say, this interferes with the rights that we all enjoy ask
citizens -- the venue may be facing a lawsuit every time that this occurs. this is the quintessential mixed-use community. the neighbors have worked for the clutter and the chaos, and that is what makes this such an interesting place to live. we have learned that there are some kinds of uses that will be fighting all the time, and we don't want to create any more conflicts between incompatible uses. smart planning does not punish anybody. it should minimize the conflict. it should protect the rights of everyone. it can direct additional housing -- in more appropriate ways and encourage a partnership
with a wide variety of interest. smart planning can make certain the entertainment industry is valued as it should be as part of a complete neighborhood. that is my presentation. >> thank you very much. the audience is aware that this was simply a presentation and the commission will not take action on this item. thank you, commissioner. are there any questions from the commission? >> thank you very much. i think that things like the stabilization act, this has been extremely great, and congratulations. i know that you have been working on this 400 years, >> and hundreds of people -- hundreds of people in the south of market have participated in
private -- this process. the three town-hall meetings, we had hundreds of people every time. they sat down and rolled up their sleeves. >> are you the entertainment representative on this plan? >> i represent the long-time residents. >> is the entertainment representative here? >> he said he would not be coming. >> i was interested in the fact that you said that housing and entertainment go together. i totally agree with that. i am wondering why 11th street has some money entertainment venues, don't you think that if we are setting this up for housing -- what kind of conflict you will see when the housing starts to move in to this area?
>> the housing is already there. >> how much housing is there? >> the plan basically recognizes what the reality already has. there will be more housing, and that is why we carefully worked on the language. this is what we describe regarding the new uses in this area. and i think that mrs. caen is a member of the noise ordinance -- and this is basically where the department of public health and the planning department, building inspection, developed that language. we went through this for a half- dozen meetings, and could not come up with anything better
than that. it is a strong guarantee to avoid future conflicts in the vicinity of the clubs -- and south of harrison street -- housing has never been allowed. we take the advantage of that. this is why the open for new entertainment to spread their. >> but there is a restriction within 200 feet of any housing? that is correct? >> there are buffer zones south of harrison street, the south of market blocks -- this is a hundred feet wide, and i don't think the 200-foot buffer zone is dramatically restrictive on the industry. and there are only three residential districts in the area.
this is half of the plan area. >> this was a great report, and thank you very much. it is nice to know that you are providing housing -- because had it happened all those years ago my club may still be there. >> they screamed bloody murder at that, but you have to take a stand. >> there is no place anymore -- but i have a couple of questions. i was trying to read the sound study of -- is this 900? what is the distance that they have to mitigate the sound? >> let me find this slide? >> i cannot read this, even with my glasses. and as you are looking at that, may i pose another question?
on this folsom st. commercial -- all of my questions are based on the understanding the report. i am not making judgments, i am just trying to understand. limited live is going to be allowed. off of the folsom-st commercial district -- and along sixth street, or any of those side streets that already have the restaurants, -- will this be prohibited to those people? >> fulsome neighborhood commercial district is only on folsom st.. the side streets will be mixed- use, general and the emphasis will be on housing. we are not introducing limited live performance where housing is the priority. the same as in district 8, if i
could go back to the map of supervisor weiner's district. the limited live performances limited to the neighborhood corridors. >> if an existing restaurant as on any street, this is -- the front door is on sixth street. they would not be permitted the ltd. -- >> this is not the perfect plan area. >> this legalizes the limited live performances on sixth street because this is functioning as the neighborhood commercial corridor. we don't have -- we have less than half a block of fifth street in this area, and seventh street and eighth street, --
these are not rest run- oriented, and the task force basically said the limited live performance was suitable to the major, ceremonial corridor. >> and the answer is that this would not be allowed? >> i have the language on ways on the screen -- and the survey does -- this is triggered by any potential noise-generating uses within 900 feet. >> 900 feet -- >> this is more than one blocked. you said that when he began -- terence alan rainout these parameters. you were under the impression that he spoke for all of the entertainment uses, within your plan? >> he appointed the board of supervisors to the task force.
>> when he left the task force a number of years ago, he was replaced by dennis and were you under the impression that he represented all of the entertainment uses? >> he was appointed by the board of supervisors to hold the entertainment seat. >> your entertainment stakeholder spoke for whom? >> there is such a thing has -- participatory democracy, where everyone gets together, like the iowa caucus -- where you get everyone in one room, drinking coffee, and you don't let everyone leave until you have reached a cut -- a consensus. this is difficult and time- consuming but we have done our best to make this a component of
the process. we invited 7000 people to each of the town hall meetings, and entertainment was on the agenda every time. we did not just here from dennis -- we heard from the whole entertainment community. more than 200 people attending each town hall meeting. we also have such a thing as representative democracy. and that is what this building is that we are standing in. the representatives are appointed to represent their constituency, and if they do this well, more power to them. and if they fail -- >> i appreciate your lesson in political science. i heard you speaking here today about residents having rights. i am a resident of san francisco and i hope that i have rights. in the opinion of your group, do
you believe that people who haven't invested money in businesses, that those businesses, no matter what the nature, also have some rights as long as this is within the framework of the law? >> this is part of the task force like everyone else. >> you are against cutting out the block on 11th street, between fall some and 11th street, only stopping the additional residential there. and the current residential course. you were against stopping any additional residential development in the 11th-street corridor. >> the conversation began with terence alan laying out that the -- there were not interested in
entertainment zone. in 2005, they were not. the entertainment zone -- the preeminent clubs on 11th street, these are clubs that have invested in that streak, and they have expressed no interest in an entertainment level. you don't see the dna lounge here, and they have developed good relations with their neighbors, and they would just as soon not screw this up at this time in the process. >> i have to " the commissioner, when he was here -- this was billed as a mixed- use city. we know that some of them do not go with others. you do not have a concrete plan.
they object to the noise of a concrete plant as well. maybe the entertainment zone is not a bad idea, because people would be protected to some degree when they make these huge investments in entertainment. thank you very much for your presentation. i appreciate this. >> it is good to see you again and thank you for your report. my question is about what is the next step, after this report? the eir for the report is essentially finished. it took them three years, which is a lot longer than it should really take. and you can ask the planning department -- the eir will be presented to the planning
commission in january, and this will trigger a 30-day review process where people can send in their comments, and i understand that this is just regarding the environmental impact. this is not a review of the plan itself. the planning department will respond to all of those questions and comments and the common response document, and it will come back to the planning commission and we will take on these discussions, as to whether we will accept the eir. at the same time we will begin considerations of the western soma plan. and once this is through the planning commission, the board of supervisors will vote up or down. i cannot get into this part of the plan.
if they begin to do this, it will have to go back to planning. it has been six years already. >> do you say that this includes the lbgtq and filipino districts? >> this is something very unique that we are doing. they are interested in the historic preservation that involves buildings. we are talking about heritage, about people and the importance of the community, the real, live human beings. we are breaking new ground. japan town is looking to do the same thing there, with the hispanic population of the mission following closely behind. >> thank you. >> what has prompted the decision to put the lgbtq and
those initials, what prompted the heritage district to be placed in soma? why there? >> why in west soma? we have a history going back past world war ii. it was part of the lgbtq community. not just the bars and bathhouses, but the businesses and social organizations. they all got their start there. and so, like the filipino community, where they were pushed out of manilatown, there is just no place left to be approached, for the lgbtq community. they have dug in their heels and this is where they plant our
stake. >> thank you very much, again. is there any public comment on this report? please come forward and limit your remarks to 3 minutes. try not to repeat what other people have said. >> can you give me just a moment to shut this down? >> bring this to you -- >> hello, everyone. i am a queer nightlife producer and a small-business advocate on the stabilization fund. i am here and i will ramble debt, but i feel that there is a lot of common interest between these communities -- that are at
stake in this plan. as many as you know, we are losing our queer space so many of us are digging in our heels to make certain that we don't lose any more of those. historically, our bars are not only a place to congregate and grow, but have been of vital fund-raising tool for the organization's, that particularly, given the economic climate we are facing, we need sources other than city funding, for the clinics to find -- the things that we do and the clubs on 11th street. this is where this has happened and hopefully will -- this will continue to happen. i also want to point out that the small businesses and the clubs and bars -- the small businesses are an incredible
economic engine in the city and nationwide. this is also an economic engine within the queer community, queer owned with queer employees, and it is very expensive to live in here. one of the industries that provides younger, queer folks with the opportunity to thrive. they can be entertainers and work here and still make a living that will allow them to call san francisco their home. the issues i have with this plan are issues that i think a lot of people share. the idea that we are, right now, threatening what is one of the most thriving entertainment corridors in the city, with a read-zoning that will enhance the existing conflicts to create
new conflicts. if the idea behind this is to limit the conflict between entertainment and housing, why are we about to triple that? why are we trying to increase these conflicts? there is a simple resolution. >> that is three minutes. >> to sum this up, if you're interested in mitigating the conflicts and see that we have a marriage between the queer history of soma and one block of 11th street won't be the death of that. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. i am a small-business owner in the south market and have a seat on the western soma task force. this is so divorced -- this is
so diverse. you have the hair salon, the restaurants, and you have -- you name it. everything is there in that area and that is where people are living because they want to be in this area. they want to be able to go to a restaurant, and want to be able to drive anywhere. we were somewhat disappointed after having a meeting with the south market business association -- we were wanting to include live entertainment for all of south of market. the live entertainment commissioners -- this is someone who cranks up their music and blair's this, full blast. this is or even have some other
instrument. bottom line is that is what it is about. to be able to enjoy themselves, spend an hour and not somewhere where it will be loud and noisy. a think we should allow that and not black that out for the western soma area. the places where it could do this. and once again i am disappointed. >> thank you. >> i recently two weeks ago celebrated 30 years in san francisco. a majority of the time